I get the impression from the article that that photo is of the now-scrapped plan for a stadium in Fremont, not a San Jose park.

DSpivack

02-08-2012, 10:25 PM

I get the impression from the article that that photo is of the now-scrapped plan for a stadium in Fremont, not a San Jose park.

The background makes me think that's San Jose, with the skyline, but the article did mention that Cisco won't be the sponsor of a stadium there, so that just leaves me confused.

Kroozah

02-08-2012, 11:29 PM

That is definitely a San Jose skyline, the only skyline Fremont has is Mission Peak.

DSpivack

02-08-2012, 11:53 PM

That is definitely a San Jose skyline, the only skyline Fremont has is Mission Peak.

That's what I guessed, but what makes that confusing is that, as the article mentioned, the Cisco Field project I thought was the now-dead deal proposed for Fremont, yet the picture still has a sign saying Cisco Field in San Jose.

Fenway

02-09-2012, 12:49 AM

This whole 'territory' thing is totally unrealistic in the 21st Century.

A's TV and Radio is available in San Jose today - and the Giants are also available in the East Bay.

Nielsen for TV ratings consider San Jose as part of the SF/Oakland market. The NBC station for San Francisco is based in San Jose.

Here is what I don't get. San Francisco is 45 miles from San Jose via the 101 and yet San Jose is included in the SF/Oak numbers.

Yet Providence which is as close to Boston as SF is to San Jose is classified as a separate market.

Providence-New Bedford 620,600

I can't see how the Giants lose any attendance with the A's actually moving further away from SF. The Giants are on blowtorch KNBR (680) which is so strong that WRKO in Boston has to protect them at night bt not beaming west.

TDog

02-09-2012, 01:18 AM

This whole 'territory' thing is totally unrealistic in the 21st Century.

A's TV and Radio is available in San Jose today - and the Giants are also available in the East Bay.

Nielsen for TV ratings consider San Jose as part of the SF/Oakland market. The NBC station for San Francisco is based in San Jose.

Here is what I don't get. San Francisco is 45 miles from San Jose via the 101 and yet San Jose is included in the SF/Oak numbers.

Yet Providence which is as close to Boston as SF is to San Jose is classified as a separate market.

Providence-New Bedford 620,600

I can't see how the Giants lose any attendance with the A's actually moving further away from SF. The Giants are on blowtorch KNBR (680) which is so strong that WRKO in Boston has to protect them at night bt not beaming west.

Oakland specifically gave the Giants territorial rights to San Jose. And the Giants built their ballpark with the understanding that they had territorial rights to San Jose.

That might not seem important, but the city of San Francisco, the state of California did not build the Giants home ballpark. The Giants privately financed it, and the Giants continue to service debt on it. The institutions financing what is now AT&T did so with the understanding that the Giants had territorial rights to San Jose.

Possibly things have changed in recent weeks, but I have heard the Giants would not have been able to secure the financing they did without having territorial rights to San Jose, and losing the territorial rights could impact the Giants paying off their ballpark debt.

MisterB

02-09-2012, 11:20 AM

I get the impression from the article that that photo is of the now-scrapped plan for a stadium in Fremont, not a San Jose park.

Actually this was the Fremont proposal:

http://www.ballparksofbaseball.com/future/cisco750.jpg

pythons007

02-09-2012, 12:17 PM

Actually this was the Fremont proposal:

http://www.ballparksofbaseball.com/future/cisco750.jpg

Geez, leftfield is in another time zone.

Lip Man 1

02-09-2012, 01:28 PM

If things are so bad for the A's owner he can do something radical...sell.

Lip

Fenway

02-09-2012, 01:49 PM

If things are so bad for the A's owner he can do something radical...sell.